In these golden days of closing the cabin and getting the kids back to school, two events slipped by, almost unnoticed. And although the kids don’t know it, both events will impact their futures. Significantly.

First, Russia certifiably destroyed its chemical weapons, and, just as notably, the United Nations passed the first binding international ban on nuclear weapons. Both events represent profound – some would say unlikely – social change.

Funny thing, social change. Its stages are so predictable. Whether the subject is slavery, domestic abuse, or women’s right to vote, the path is always the same. Something is accepted and normal. Then this normalcy is questioned, first by a few and then by growing numbers of ordinary folks. Moral arguments such as fairness, liberty and equality are advanced. Religious and business leaders weigh in. The questioning becomes more vocal, more visible. Political figures are pressured to act. Laws are passed, haltingly and with much controversy. Legal enforcement is initially spotty. But over time, the once-normal behavior becomes anathema. And when inevitable breaches subsequently occur, the public reacts with outrage.

While these stages are predictable, the timeline is not. And nothing demonstrates this more clearly than the tale of two weapons, chemical and nuclear.

Chemical weapons, first used 100 years ago in the trenches of World War I, were cheap, easy, lethal and indiscriminate. They terrified soldiers and civilians alike and provided a transient military advantage. Over decades, they became less acceptable and finally illegal. When the world outlawed them in 1993, it created the Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to technically supervise and scrupulously validate their world-wide elimination. The OPCW, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013, recently certified that Russia has finally destroyed its huge stockpile of chemical weapons.

Do these weapons still exist in the world? Yes. In fact, the U.S. is still completing the enormously complex destruction of our own chemical stockpile. Do rogue nations and rogue groups still use these weapons? Yes. Syria’s recent use of chemicals caused us to recoil in horror. But after a century, what was once accepted is now unconscionable and unusual. The stages were predictable, but the timeline never was.

Now, the tale of nuclear weapons. First used 70 years ago in the carnage of World War II, nuclear weapons were expensive, technical, lethal and indiscriminate. The prospect of their use terrified soldiers and civilians everywhere and provided military advantage only until the other side produced more and better devices. Over decades, they became less acceptable but remained legal when in the hands of the original five-nation nuclear club (France, Russia, China, the UK, and the US). Then NATO shared its weapons with some friends in Europe, including Turkey. Against the rules, India, Pakistan and Israel joined the club, officially or unofficially. Iran signaled its intention. North Korea, asking permission of no one, muscled in a decade ago. Somehow, this doesn’t sound like progress, especially when the results could incinerate all life on the planet.

Moral arguments ring from churches, including the Vatican and the American Baptist Churches. The International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), an effective group of vocal citizens, just won the Nobel Peace Prize for its role in getting the UN member states to pass the international ban. Predictably, no member of the nuclear club voted in favor of prohibition. Bellicose political pronouncements abound. The implementation of prohibition is, at best, years away.

The tale of chemical weapons, despite a century-long timeline, seems like a qualified success. The tale of nuclear weapons does not – at least not yet. But “yet” is the operative word. A timeline can be shortened, and comatose nuclear disarmament can be revived. When the Nobel Committee awarded the Prize to ICAN last week, it sent both a signal and a stimulus. It expressed hope, it encouraged action, and it sounded an alarm. It is one voice – of many – attempting to accelerate the timeline of a vital social change before it’s too late for the kids at school.

Maureen K. Reed, M.D., Stillwater, is former executive director of the Nobel Peace Prize Forum, which is based at Augsburg University, Minneapolis.

As you comment, please be respectful of other commenters and other viewpoints. Our goal with article comments is to provide a space for civil, informative and constructive conversations. We reserve the right to remove any comment we deem to be defamatory, rude, insulting to others, hateful, off-topic or reckless to the community. See our full terms of use here.

More in Opinion

LEAVE THESE APPOINTMENTS FOR THE NEW MAYOR The city of St. Paul’s Planning Commission and Capital Improvement Budget (CIB) committees are bodies with the purpose of advising the mayor on matters concerning land use and zoning (Planning Commission) and prioritizing what gets built with our tax money (CIB). The people who serve on these committees are appointed by the mayor...

This is a bad time to be a Vulcan. Inopportune, to put it mildly. The fellows, who once deserved to be rounded up and placed in the public stocks, have brought themselves into the modern era, well, as far as you can be brought in while still wearing a red suit and covering your head in the comb of a...

A DANGEROUS GUN BILL The extremely conservative U.S. House of Representatives has passed a terrible bill. It would actually make it legal for more dangerous and untrained people to carry loaded, hidden guns in more public places in every state. Only six Democrats voted yes. This government body would allow concealed-and-carry permit holders from other states that have lax gun-violence...

“I, of all people, am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office, and a man who has repeatedly preyed on young girls campaigns for the Senate with the full support of his party,” Sen. Al...

Here is the tweet I sent to Al Franken Wednesday night: @SenFranken I am a conservative Republican known as the Sarah Palin of Philadelphia. I urge you not to resign. Sexual assault is real, and as an asylum practitioner I know that better than anyone. Your resignation would diminish the harm that real victims suffer. Don’t do it. He obviously...

When I decided to go public with my sexual harassment experience involving my academic mentor at the University of Southern California, I joined an ever-growing number of women who have recently come out with similar stories. Like so many others, my story is one of abuse of power, professional vulnerability and the inability to prove exactly what happened. My academic...